Can the Tories win a majority?

[pinko]

Dream on.

I am dreaming of a time when the Harperites are soundly defeated much like Mike Harris and his bunch of neoclowns.

[segnosaur]

my new favourite quote...

“Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives.”- John Stuart Mill

Problem is, that's not necessarily a very accurate statement.

I don't have any figures for Canada, but in the United States 2004 presidential election, while Kerry did get more support among people who had post-graduate degrees, Bush ended up with more support among those who were collage graduates. In addition, Kerry had slightly more support among those that actually did not complete high school. And it should be noted that in every educational level, neither Candidate got less than 40% of the vote. (So you can't necessarily say "all people voted a particular way".)

Granted, having a degree does not make someone automatically "smart", and a high school drop-out isn't necessarily "dumb", but it provides at least a little guidance. (e.g. I suspect the "average" holder of a degree will be smarter than the "average" high school drop out.) But I think its fair to say that "intelligence" doesn't necessarily have a strong relationship with voting patterns.

http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2004/pages/results/states/US/P/00/epolls.0.html

Edited January 13, 2011 by segnosaur

[nicky10013]

Dream on.

The only people dreaming are those thinking Harper can actually win a majority. It's very possible he'll win a minority government, but a majority? The gains in the GTA they're banking on to do it just aren't there.

[nicky10013]

PS - if the Tories want to actually wage a campaign based on keeping scheduled corporate tax breaks - tax breaks that will have absolutely no bearing on ordinary Canadian's lives, go right ahead. However, it only makes the majority talk that much funnier. We already have some of the lowest corporate tax rates in the world before the scheduled cut takes place. So what Harper and Flaherty are essentially doing is basically taking out more debt and handing Canadians cash which ordinary folks pay interest on directly to companies which unforutnately aren't hiring more people. Combined this with the spending fiascos of the census, the fake lake, 16 billion dollar fighter planes and 10 billion dollar prisons?

I think Canadians would respond to the "tax hike" rhetoric if it was an income tax hike or a GST/HST hike but it isn't. It isn't even a hike. The Liberals are just talking about suspending this cut and people will see through the Tory rhetoric which tries and make it look otherwise. We're talking about corporate welfare.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/ottawa-notebook/tories-draw-line-in-election-sand-over-corporate-tax-cuts/article1868330/

Edited January 13, 2011 by nicky10013

[PIK]

The only people dreaming are those thinking Harper can actually win a majority. It's very possible he'll win a minority government, but a majority? The gains in the GTA they're banking on to do it just aren't there.

Just like when the polls said mulroney only had 20% support in the country just before he won the biggest majority to date. The libs are hoping the public stays stupid to believe all the crap he has come out with, and the public is getting smarter all the time.

[segnosaur]

The only people dreaming are those thinking Harper can actually win a majority. It's very possible he'll win a minority government, but a majority? The gains in the GTA they're banking on to do it just aren't there.

Actually, I remember listening to a radio interview of a Pollster who pointed out that the Conservatives could win a majority, if they are able to "regionalize" the election. (i.e. play up election issues that are important on a province by province basis, rather than trying to deal with issues that are national in scope.)

In places like the west, that would mean playing up the gun registry (in particular targeting the ridings held by the NDP; there are several rural/small town ridings that the conservatives could indeed pick up). In Ontario, it would involve highlighting Canada's financial success when compared to the U.S. and other countries. In the east, they could highlight increased revenue from oil projects. (Granted, that has more to do with increases in the price of oil, but it still may be effective.)

Unfortunately since this was a radio interview, I don't have direct references. (And since I was in my car at the time, I didn't have the ability to write down the pollster's name.) And I certainly don't think its a guaranteed win. (I'm just repeating the arguments that were made; they seemed reasonable.)

[wyly]

Granted, having a degree does not make someone automatically "smart", and a high school drop-out isn't necessarily "dumb", but it provides at least a little guidance. (e.g. I suspect the "average" holder of a degree will be smarter than the "average" high school drop out.) But I think its fair to say that "intelligence" doesn't necessarily have a strong relationship with voting patterns.

yes, I know some people who never went to high school and are extremely intelligent and other with uni degrees who although they are good at what they do are not very "common sense smart"...it's an error to make an absolute link between intelligence and education...

and the type of education can be relevant...my daughter who is in the social sciences observed that many students from the business/finance sector she encounters may be great with all things financial but they tend to be social retards, where as she is hopeless at financial matters...so being smart/educated or even a genius in one field does not automatically carry over to other disciplines...my nephew the engineer is brilliant and wealthy but understanding society is not his forte, picture the character Sheldon of the "Big Bang Theory", that's my nephew...

it's just my lifetime of experience with people and their voting tendencies the dumb and under educated tend to be very conservative...not that there aren't stupid people who vote for the left they're just fewer of them...progressive liberal minded people tend to be inquisitive and objective, always questioning, never satisfied with the status quo, conservatives the exact opposite change confuses and frightens them...

[PIK]

Even little things like the seal deal with china can do wonders with the eastern vote. Beef sales double to china and favourite tourist destination harper got, things that chretien with his great partnership with china he alway bragged about could not get it done. But I have always expected his trade missions to china was just him setting up his money making retirement with maurice strong in china ,where strong lives and chretien goes to all the time.

[nicky10013]

Actually, I remember listening to a radio interview of a Pollster who pointed out that the Conservatives could win a majority, if they are able to "regionalize" the election. (i.e. play up election issues that are important on a province by province basis, rather than trying to deal with issues that are national in scope.)

In places like the west, that would mean playing up the gun registry (in particular targeting the ridings held by the NDP; there are several rural/small town ridings that the conservatives could indeed pick up). In Ontario, it would involve highlighting Canada's financial success when compared to the U.S. and other countries. In the east, they could highlight increased revenue from oil projects. (Granted, that has more to do with increases in the price of oil, but it still may be effective.)

Unfortunately since this was a radio interview, I don't have direct references. (And since I was in my car at the time, I didn't have the ability to write down the pollster's name.) And I certainly don't think its a guaranteed win. (I'm just repeating the arguments that were made; they seemed reasonable.)

I'm 99% sure what you heard was Nik Nanos. It came out in the beginning of December but Tory numbers, especially in Ontario, have gotten worse since then. Could it work? Sure, anything is possible. However, I doubt it. If he couldn't win a majority with Stephan Dion as a foil, I don't think he'll be able to win one period. Though he's already been written off, what we're forgeting is that Ignatieff can actually speak english. When giving speeches he's very passionate and very articulate. His expectations are so low that he's going to shock people in a campaign. I'm not saying he's going to win, but at this juncture, also considering the fact that Conservative popularity still hasn't rebounded since the second prorogation and the amount of undecideds out there, the Liberals will pick up seats. It's just a matter of how many.

[nicky10013]

Just like when the polls said mulroney only had 20% support in the country just before he won the biggest majority to date. The libs are hoping the public stays stupid to believe all the crap he has come out with, and the public is getting smarter all the time.

See, the problem here is that Harper is ALREADY PM. He's a known quantity. Mulroney wasn't. He was opposition leader...like Mr. Ignatieff for whom this analogy fits quite a bit better. For good or bad, the PM is always more popular.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/opinion/life-cycle-of-an-opposition-leader/article1848365/

[segnosaur]

it's just my lifetime of experience with people and their voting tendencies the dumb and under educated tend to be very conservative...not that there aren't stupid people who vote for the left they're just fewer of them...progressive liberal minded people tend to be inquisitive and objective, always questioning, never satisfied with the status quo, conservatives the exact opposite change confuses and frightens them...

And here's where the irony sets in...

You spend all this time talking about "smart" and "dumb" people, then you go ahead and exhibit the biggest example of 'dumbness' by pointing your "lifetime of experience". Its the type of backward thinking that keeps sham psychics and quack medical claims going.

Perhaps a quote that you should pay more attention to is "The Plural of Anecdotes is not data". The fact that you yourself may have found that "dumb" people are conservative "in your experience" is irrelevant. Ever consider that perhaps you simply may not have encountered a wide enough variety of people both dumb and smart? Or that your particular experiences are an outlier? There are ~30 million people in Canada, and billions of people world wide; do you really think you've encountered enough of them to make a proper determination to characterize how dumb or smart people vote?

The statistics I provided (re: the 2004 U.S. election) may not have been perfect, but the random nature and wide spread distribution of poll respondents makes it a lot more convincing than something based on "your experience".

Frankly, I think all this is basically you using the "No true Scotsman" fallacy... i.e. because you have a pre-disposition to support the political left, you will automatically characterize anyone who supports conservative causes as "dumb" regardless of how smart they really are.

[segnosaur]

Actually, I remember listening to a radio interview of a Pollster who pointed out that the Conservatives could win a majority, if they are able to "regionalize" the election.

I'm 99% sure what you heard was Nik Nanos.

Actually, that sounds very familiar and I think you're right.

It came out in the beginning of December but Tory numbers, especially in Ontario, have gotten worse since then. Could it work? Sure, anything is possible. However, I doubt it. If he couldn't win a majority with Stephan Dion as a foil, I don't think he'll be able to win one period.

Dion may have been portrayed as "incompetent", but remember that he was from Quebec, and la Belle province does seem to have a habit of "supporting its own".

Granted, the majority of seats are still going to go to the Bloc (so we may only be talking about a couple of seats here and there.)

Though he's already been written off, what we're forgeting is that Ignatieff can actually speak english. When giving speeches he's very passionate and very articulate.

Yes he is. However, when the Liberals had their recent bus tour, Ignatieff's popularity didn't necessarily increase (even though the Liberal party as a whole did.) Granted, this might change if it were an election and he got more media attention, but there's no guarantee of that.

And even if he can "speak English", that probably won't help him out west (where the Liberals were on the "wrong side" of the gun registry debate.) And in Ontario, I don't think a speaker's native language has had that much impact historically.

[nicky10013]

Actually, that sounds very familiar and I think you're right.

Dion may have been portrayed as "incompetent", but remember that he was from Quebec, and la Belle province does seem to have a habit of "supporting its own".

Granted, the majority of seats are still going to go to the Bloc (so we may only be talking about a couple of seats here and there.)

Yup, the Bloc nullifies Quebec.

Yes he is. However, when the Liberals had their recent bus tour, Ignatieff's popularity didn't necessarily increase (even though the Liberal party as a whole did.) Granted, this might change if it were an election and he got more media attention, but there's no guarantee of that.

Big changes happen after the writ is dropped. As seen in the article I posted after I responded to you, PM's and their governments are always more popular than the opposition going into a campaign. It's the way it was, is and will be. The bus tour was touted as a widespread success. The few articles I saw about it, even the ones from the National Post were uniformly positive. Everyone was saying how down to Earth he was and how articulate he was and how likeable he turned out to be. The tour just got so little coverage that of course it never changed as many minds as needed. He won't get that attention until the campaign. I think there is a guarantee he will get the attention. I think it's what he does with it that'll decide how the party does and I think it'll be fairly positive.

And even if he can "speak English", that probably won't help him out west (where the Liberals were on the "wrong side" of the gun registry debate.) And in Ontario, I don't think a speaker's native language has had that much impact historically.

Historically no, but Dion could barely speak the language. He had real difficulty in the english debate and during speeches. If you have a hard time speaking english, you'll have a hard time getting your message across. Whereas Chretien had an accent, he had absolutely no problem with English. Dion did.

As for the West, the Liberals don't really have a hope in the west until there's a greater demographic shift within the urban centres of places like Edmonton and Calgary. The west wasn't voting Liberal gun registry or no.

Edited January 13, 2011 by nicky10013

[wyly]

And here's where the irony sets in...

You spend all this time talking about "smart" and "dumb" people, then you go ahead and exhibit the biggest example of 'dumbness' by pointing your "lifetime of experience". Its the type of backward thinking that keeps sham psychics and quack medical claims going.

the dumbness is yours alone I deliberately pointed out it was my experience/anecdotal...just as the Inuit have pointed out their anecdotal experiences that the arctic winters seem brighter than winters past, and their anecdotal evidence has proven to be accurate, the "Plural of Anecdotes can indeed be data"...

just as I know most albertans vote conservative, I don't need election data to tell me that my anecdotal experiences tell me albertans vote conservative primarily for two reasons 1- fear of losing their oil patch jobs 2- there are a lot of dumb under-educated hillbillies and creationists in them thar hills...

[wyly]

As for the West, the Liberals don't really have a hope in the west until there's a greater demographic shift within the urban centres of places like Edmonton and Calgary. The west wasn't voting Liberal gun registry or no.

saskatchewan has a strong social/leftist tilt conservatives do not have a lock on it, they flop back and forth depending on who they're pissed at most.. BC also has a leftist tilt in the urban ridings again like Sask the voters can turn on a dime...

in alberta edmonton and calgary are cosmopolitan areas that are more liberal than the surrounding hillbilly regions but since jobs everywhere are tied to the health of the oil patch people will hold their noses and vote conservative to protect their incomes...if the jobs were secure you would see a shift in the urbanite vote...Calgary has now elected an even more leftwing mayor than the last liberal mayor we had, but mayors don't influence the oil patch/jobs, so it wasn't an issue...

[nicky10013]

saskatchewan has a strong social/leftist tilt conservatives do not have a lock on it, they flop back and forth depending on who they're pissed at most.. BC also has a leftist tilt in the urban ridings again like Sask the voters can turn on a dime...

in alberta edmonton and calgary are cosmopolitan areas that are more liberal than the surrounding hillbilly regions but since jobs everywhere are tied to the health of the oil patch people will hold their noses and vote conservative to protect their incomes...if the jobs were secure you would see a shift in the urbanite vote...Calgary has now elected an even more leftwing mayor than the last liberal mayor we had, but mayors don't influence the oil patch/jobs, so it wasn't an issue...

Absolutely. I think there's hope of winning a seat or two in Saskatchewan, a few will be won in Manitoba, Alberta is a lost cause as well as rural BC.

[segnosaur]

Dion may have been portrayed as "incompetent", but remember that he was from Quebec, and la Belle province does seem to have a habit of "supporting its own".

Granted, the majority of seats are still going to go to the Bloc (so we may only be talking about a couple of seats here and there.)

Yup, the Bloc nullifies Quebec.

For the most part, yes. But like I said, there is the possibility to pick up a couple of seats. (Not that I expect the conservatives to sweep the province, but remember, they only need to pick up about a dozen or so seats nationally to win a majority.) At the very least they probably won't loose any.

Big changes happen after the writ is dropped.

Your right, they do... that's why I will not make any election predictions myself.

As seen in the article I posted after I responded to you, PM's and their governments are always more popular than the opposition going into a campaign.

Which of course is not exactly relevant. PMs call elections when they think they can win (or, rarely, when they have no other choice.) Doesn't necessarily mean that either the government or opposition can gain or loose support.

The bus tour was touted as a widespread success. The few articles I saw about it, even the ones from the National Post were uniformly positive. Everyone was saying how down to Earth he was and how articulate he was and how likeable he turned out to be.

Poll numbers might disagree:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/bus-tour-boosts-liberal-support-but-not-ignatieffs-poll-suggests/article1687676/

Michael Ignatieff's summer-long, cross-country bus tour has given a modest boost to Liberal fortunes but done little to improve the Opposition Leader's popularity, a new poll suggests. The Harris-Decima survey conducted for The Canadian Press indicates the Liberals have climbed to 30 per cent support...However, 54 per cent of respondents still registered an unfavourable view of Mr. Ignatieff, compared to only 29 per cent who had a positive view of the leader.

Historically no, but Dion could barely speak the language. He had real difficulty in the english debate and during speeches. If you have a hard time speaking english, you'll have a hard time getting your message across. Whereas Chretien had an accent, he had absolutely no problem with English. Dion did.

Sorry, guess we have a difference of opinion about how to define "problem with english".

As for the West, the Liberals don't really have a hope in the west until there's a greater demographic shift within the urban centres of places like Edmonton and Calgary. The west wasn't voting Liberal gun registry or no.

But then, where exactly do you think the Liberals will pick up seats?

You agree that the West wasn't going to vote Liberal regardless.

We've pretty much agreed that Quebec is Bloc Territory.

They're already the leading party in Ontario. (No real room for growth there).

They're also strong in atlantic Canada.

I don't really see that much opportunity for growth. On the other hand, there are places the Conservatives can pick away at the Liberals/NDP.

[segnosaur]

And here's where the irony sets in...

You spend all this time talking about "smart" and "dumb" people, then you go ahead and exhibit the biggest example of 'dumbness' by pointing your "lifetime of experience". Its the type of backward thinking that keeps sham psychics and quack medical claims going.

the dumbness is yours alone I deliberately pointed out it was my experience/anecdotal...

Which is the point... Its your experience, but there is no guarantee that it is a universal truth.

just as the Inuit have pointed out their anecdotal experiences that the arctic winters seem brighter than winters past, and their anecdotal evidence has proven to be accurate...

Irrelevant cherry picked data.

We also have anecdotes that "homeopathy" (a sham medical treatment) cures illness (it doesn't... its just water). We also have anecdotes that "Psychic X predicted the future" (they don't... its just a technique called cold reading). We also have anecdotes about the "power of prayer" (no more effective than placebos).

That's why scientists perform proper studies. That's why we gather statistics. That's why we try to eliminate variables.

And that's why your claim of "stupid people vote conservative" is nothing more than a politically charged "no true scottsman" fallacy.

[pinko]

Just like when the polls said mulroney only had 20% support in the country just before he won the biggest majority to date. The libs are hoping the public stays stupid to believe all the crap he has come out with, and the public is getting smarter all the time.

Yes and we all remember what happened to the Conservatives when people finally figured things out.

[segnosaur]

Just like when the polls said mulroney only had 20% support in the country just before he won the biggest majority to date. The libs are hoping the public stays stupid to believe all the crap he has come out with, and the public is getting smarter all the time.

Yes and we all remember what happened to the Conservatives when people finally figured things out.

Yeah, they won a second majority.

[nicky10013]

For the most part, yes. But like I said, there is the possibility to pick up a couple of seats. (Not that I expect the conservatives to sweep the province, but remember, they only need to pick up about a dozen or so seats nationally to win a majority.) At the very least they probably won't loose any.

Your right, they do... that's why I will not make any election predictions myself.

Which of course is not exactly relevant. PMs call elections when they think they can win (or, rarely, when they have no other choice.) Doesn't necessarily mean that either the government or opposition can gain or loose support.

Poll numbers might disagree:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/bus-tour-boosts-liberal-support-but-not-ignatieffs-poll-suggests/article1687676/

Michael Ignatieff's summer-long, cross-country bus tour has given a modest boost to Liberal fortunes but done little to improve the Opposition Leader's popularity, a new poll suggests. The Harris-Decima survey conducted for The Canadian Press indicates the Liberals have climbed to 30 per cent support...However, 54 per cent of respondents still registered an unfavourable view of Mr. Ignatieff, compared to only 29 per cent who had a positive view of the leader.

Sorry, guess we have a difference of opinion about how to define "problem with english".

But then, where exactly do you think the Liberals will pick up seats?

You agree that the West wasn't going to vote Liberal regardless.

We've pretty much agreed that Quebec is Bloc Territory.

They're already the leading party in Ontario. (No real room for growth there).

They're also strong in atlantic Canada.

I don't really see that much opportunity for growth. On the other hand, there are places the Conservatives can pick away at the Liberals/NDP.

Ontario. Southern Ontario is a place for big gains. They also lost a couple seats in Northern Ontario to the NDP which they can win back.

Despite Quebec being Bloc territory, there is room for gain there as well. The Liberals lead non seperatist Parties but the Conservatives also have 10 seats. Some seats can be poached from the Bloc, some from the Conservatives. They won't come near winning the province outright but to pick up a few seats certainly wouldn't hurt.

The latest story to come out that the Conservatives have 45 seats they lost within a 10% margin they think they can win. There's a list equally as long for the LPC so it's definitely a two way street.

[segnosaur]

On where the Liberals could pick up seats...

Ontario. Southern Ontario is a place for big gains. They also lost a couple seats in Northern Ontario to the NDP which they can win back.

The Liberals were already the leading party in Urban Toronto (and had parts of Urban Ottawa as well). Many of the other ridings are either strongly held by the NDP, or have a strong rural component. (If anything, I'd have to say the conservatives are more likely to pick up some of those seats than the Liberals.)

Despite Quebec being Bloc territory, there is room for gain there as well. The Liberals lead non seperatist Parties but the Conservatives also have 10 seats. Some seats can be poached from the Bloc, some from the Conservatives. They won't come near winning the province outright but to pick up a few seats certainly wouldn't hurt.

But as I pointed out before, if Dion (a Quebecer) didn't do that well in Quebec, why do you expect Ignatief to?

And keep in mind that at least some polls show the Liberals trailing the Bloc, the Conservatives, and even the NDP in Quebec.

http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/12/30/poll-puts-liberals-fourth-in-quebec/

[PIK]

As for his bus tour ,I would bet iggy has not been back to a tim hortons for a boston cream since,that is the biggest problem with the libs ,they think canadians are stupid.

[bloodyminded]

As for his bus tour ,I would bet iggy has not been back to a tim hortons for a boston cream since,that is the biggest problem with the libs ,they think canadians are stupid.

You should capitalize "libs," so that you're not trying to insist that the majority of Canadians think Canadians are stupid. (It could be the case, I guess, but I doubt it.)

Edited January 17, 2011 by bloodyminded

[nicky10013]

As for his bus tour ,I would bet iggy has not been back to a tim hortons for a boston cream since,that is the biggest problem with the libs ,they think canadians are stupid.

You're accusing him of acting like Canadian's are stupid while expecting he has to go to Tim Horton's to maintain popularity?

Now, I don't think either case is true but hear me out. If he really does think Canadians are stupid (and I don't think he does) and Canadians expect their politicians to go to Tim Horton's to remain popular (and I don't think they do), then Ignatieff I think is on to something with the whole Canadians are stupid thing.